On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 03:19:55PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 10:37:43AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > > Some require it in the "end-user documentation" (Apache), which seems > > > stronger. > > > > That's a problem, then. > > The full clause: > > 3. The end-user documentation included with the redistribution, > if any, must include the following acknowledgment: > "This product includes software developed by the > Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/)." > Alternately, this acknowledgment may appear in the software itself, > if and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear. > > Some discussion on this down in one of the other threads observed > that "may appear in the software itself" does clearly include > /usr/share/doc/foo/copyright, or wherever the license text is--it > doesn't say "in the binary itself". So, if this interpretation is > valid, it's still an annoying verbatim requirement, but without > contamination issues.
How does the ASF interpret the clause? -- G. Branden Robinson | I'm a firm believer in not drawing Debian GNU/Linux | trend lines before you have data [EMAIL PROTECTED] | points. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Tim Ottinger
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
